Truth Magazine

By Harold Fite

It was the opening service of the gospel meeting. Members of the congregation arrived early to greet the visitors. Some had brought neighbors and friends. As the service began one could see the interest and enthusiasm as all blended their voices in singing praises to God and edifying one another. Prayers ascended to God from sincere and fervent hearts. The preacher preached the word with simplicity and power, yet with obvious love and concern for the lost. There were those who obeyed the Gospel and Christians were strengthened and challenged, and all left buoyed in spirit and with happy anticipation of the remaining services of the meeting.

This is the ideal for which every congregation should strive. Fantasizing will not accomplish it. Meetings described above do not just happen! Preparation is essential. A successful meeting is the result of careful planning and diligent work, with the cooperation and support of local members.

Following are some things I have learned over the years which tend to promote successful meetings:

Plan the Meeting

If a congregation has a meeting just because it is customary to have one every year and announce it about a week before it takes place, that meeting is not going to create much excitement and will fail to obtain the maxi-mum good.

A few years ago there was a popular TV show called, “The A Team,” wherein George Peppard, who played the leading character, would frequently say, “I love it when a plan comes together.” There is no “coming together” without a plan. Elders need to ask themselves, “What are we trying to accomplish by having a meeting?” Are the lessons to be directed to the alien or the Christian  or both? Have a purpose; know what you want to accomplish. Once the objective is defined, find ways and means to accomplish it. Plan the meeting, then work the plan. What a joy and sense of satisfaction when the “plan comes together.”

Select the Preacher

Select the one who will preach the word of God. Paul said, “For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake” (2 Cor. 4:5). An awesome responsibility is laid upon preachers because of the nature, purpose and power of the gospel. The gospel is absolute truth, designed for the saving of the soul, and possesses the power to accomplish its purpose (Rom. 1:16). With that word the preacher is to enlighten the mind, disturb the conscience, energize the will, and stir the hearts of his hearers. Preach the word! (2 Tim. 4:2)

Select a preacher whom you think will be the best choice in obtaining your objective. This may involve some long-range planning. If a preacher has already been selected, think how you may best use his knowledge and expertise to benefit the church and/or the unsaved.

Advertise the Meeting

While big-city newspapers are financially prohibitive to many churches, there are small community papers that offer relatively cheap advertising. This affords opportunity to advertise at a nominal rate.

The add should be phrased so as to awaken the attention of those who see it and to cause them to think. In our advertising we are not to resort to the undignified or the grossly sensational, and yet we want to set forth information in a striking way.

There are public bulletin boards (washaterias, food stores, etc.) on which announcements can be placed.

Announcements of the meeting can be sent to church visitors. At Fry Road we keep a record of our visitors throughout the year. As we approach our gospel meetings we send them an announcement of the meeting, following up with a personal letter, and then a phone call. Members are encouraged to write them a personal letter or call, inviting them to the meeting. While various methods are good, we all recognize that there is nothing better than “word of mouth” invitations.

Social Gatherings

The night before the meeting have a “get-together” for all to get acquainted with the visiting preacher. Talk up the meeting. I have found this kindles interest, enthusiasm, and participation in the meeting.

Sometime during the meeting, provide opportunity for the young people to visit with the guest preacher. You may be pleasantly surprised by the nature of the questions young people ask. They not only want to know about the preacher’s work, but about him as a person. The preacher wants to know more about the thinking of youth. They both recognize the value of the other. A bond is formed which contributes considerably to the success of the meeting.

The more that elders can involve the entire membership in the meetings, the more successful the meeting will be. Remember it is “our” meeting, not “theirs” or “yours.”

Good Singing

Good singing is essential to a successful meeting. Singing in spirit and truth prepares the heart to receive the message. It sets the tone for the meeting.

Our singing should be the expression of our heart, as we praise God and teach and admonish one another in song. Without the heart, singing is just a sound.

In my home congregation, prior to a meeting, we usually have a few services where we spend extra time singing. We learn new songs and try to improve on those we already know that we might render to God the very best of which we are capable.

What about the song leader? In my judgment a congregation should use the best it has. Using a different leader each night of a meeting does not usually work very well.

“The righteous sings and rejoices” (Prov. 29:6).

Pray for the Meeting

Prayer is a powerful tool God has given us. It changes things! “The supplication of a righteous man avalleth much in its working” (James 5:16).

Prayer comes from a realization of a need and God’s ability to supply. “And my God shall supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:19).

We need to pray for God’s blessings to rest on the meeting. Pray for the members that all might be cognizant of their true priorities and commitment in Christ. Pray for the lost (specifically for those you invite). Pray for the preacher. Paul exhorted the brethren to “pray for him that he might be bold to make known the mystery of Christ” (Eph. 6:19).

“A prayerless preparation will mean a powerless effort in a gospel meeting” (Don McWhorter, Bulletin Digest).

When all preparation has been made, you can be pleased in that you did what you could. You can now say, “We are all here present to hear all things that have commanded thee of the Lord” (Acts 10:33).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 16, p. 21-22
August 19, 1993

By Harry R. Osborne

The war in the Middle East gave rise to much speculation attempting to relate events to Bible prophecy. Many TV preachers were busy warning their audiences of an imminent battle of Armageddon. Several months ago on television, I heard Ed Young from the Second Baptist church in Houston proclaiming that the recent conflict was the “vestibule to Armageddon,” whatever that is. Others have preached on “The Identity of the Antichrist” and a host of other pet premillennial theories. The current speculation is simply the latest in a long line. Let us consider a few examples.

In the early part of this century, World War I gave rise to such speculation. Some premillennialists published books claiming Armageddon was just around the corner. All of them said the events of that time were the “clear” fulfillment of prophecies about “the end time.” The premillennial teachings about the tribulation, Armageddon, the rapture, and the beginning of the thousand year reign of Christ on the earth were all supposed to become a reality within that generation. Of course, the fact that we are still here more than a generation later would strongly suggest that their predictions were incorrect.

World War II brought the premillennial speculators out in force again. Hitler was commonly viewed as “the Antichrist” whose destruction would initiate a thousand year reign of Christ upon the earth. Hitler’s hatred of the Jews and his alliance with Mussolini (the successor to ancient Rome) fueled the speculation to a roaring flame. The events of that time were again said to be the “clear” fulfillment of prophecies found in Ezekiel, Daniel, Joel, Revelation, and other Bible books. The predictions again failed to come true and it was back to the drawing board once again.

The establishment of the Jewish state in Palestine brought another round of speculation from premillennialists. They claimed this was the “clear” fulfillment of Bible prophecy regarding the return of Israel to Palestine. Actually, God had promised that only a remnant would return to the land following captivity (Isa. 10:20-25). That return was to take place after seventy years of Judah’s captivity in Babylon (Jer. 29:10-14). The Bible recorded that fulfillment as having taken place in the 5th and 6th centuries before Christ (see the books of Ezra and Nehemiah; 2 Chron. 36:17-23). God had previously kept his promise to give the Israelites all of the land promised to Abraham (Josh. 21:43-45; 23:14-16; 1 Kgs.4:21;Neb. 9:7-9;Psa.105:42-44).

In more recent time, the Middle East wars of 1967 and 1973 caused a rash of speculation. Hal Lindsey’s book, TheLate GreatPlanetEarth, was written during that time. Lindsey said forces led by Egypt and Russia would join to battle Israel in the great tribulation. We were told that Russia would be the “King of the North” in a confederacy made up of Iran, “black African nations,” Libya, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, “the Iron Curtain countries,” and the Cossacks. We were further told that Egypt would be the “King of the South” in a coalition with the “Arabic nations” (which would include Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and other such harmonious partners) along with the “countries of black Africa.” After Russia was wiped out, the Arabs and the Chinese were supposed to be allies in the battle of Armageddon, according to Lindsey. Lindsey’s whole theory was predicated on the continuance of Nasser’s pro-Soviet policies and Egypt’s continued leadership in seeking the annihilation of Israel. Unfortunately for Lindsey’s theories, Nasser’s death brought a change in Egyptian policy. In its time, Lindsey’s teaching was touted as the “clear” teaching of the Bible.

With the decline of Soviet domination, premillennialists seemed to become unsure about the “Russians” as the focus of the armies allied against Israel. As a matter of fact, the crumbling of Communism across eastern Europe and much of the world has dealt a severe blow to the previous theories of the premillennialists. Their “clear” teachings from books of prophecy suddenly became very unclear. Until late last year, premillennialists got extremely quiet.

The war in the Persian Gulf again brought the proponents of premillennial theories out of the woodwork. However, an amazing thing has happened! The theories have all changed! What we heard to be the “clear” teaching of Bible prophecies a few years ago has suddenly been replaced with entirely different teachings also said to be “clear” from Bible prophecies. I must confess my inability to understand how all of these contradictory, changed, and convoluted theories can be passed off as “clear” teaching by fellows who taught entirely different theories a few years ago. What amazes me even more is that they do it with a straight face!

Over the past few decades, the list of leading candidates for “the Antichrist” included Henry Kissinger, Anwar Sadat, a Soviet president, the head of the European Common Market, and an unnamed man of “Roman descent.” Now, I hear rumors from premillennial quarters that it is surely Saddam Hussein. How is that for “clear” teaching? It seems to me that it would have been far easier for the premillennialists to have understood the truth on this matter than to change their predictions. After all “the Antichrist” is like “the unknown tongue.” Both are an attempt to identify a particular one while the Bible usage is generic. In 1 Corinthians 14, any language foreign to a listener which he did not understand was “an unknown tongue.” In John’s use of the term “antichrist,” he simply refers to one who opposed the person or teaching of Christ (1 In. 2:18, 22; 4:3, 7). Instead of finally seeing the truth, our premillennial friends have stepped into the speculation ring once again in preparation for another bloody nose to their theories when the new “clear” teaching fails again.

For the past 40 years or so, the premillennialists have also told us that the “Babylon” of prophesied destruction in the book of Revelation is either a one-world religion under the control of the Vatican or the Soviet Union. Now, the TV preachers are telling us “Babylon” is the land where ancient Babylon literally existed Iraq. How “clear” can it get?

Actually, these differing theories all have a common point  they are false! They all claim that the book of Revelation deals with events of our time, not a past time. When their predictions fail to come true, they simply change them and ask people to accept the new theories as the `”clear” teaching of the book. The premillennialists of this century have perverted and re-perverted the book of Revelation more than any people in religious history. If they would just look at the book and listen to its truly clear statement, they would abandon their absurd theories. Let’s see what the book really says about when its prophecies were to be fulfilled:

Revelation 1:1  “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass.”

Revelation 1:3  “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand.”

Revelation 22:6 “And he said unto me, These words are faithful and true: and the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angels to show unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass.”

Revelation 22:10  “And he saith unto me, Seal not up the words of the prophecy of this book; for the time is at hand.”

From beginning to end, the book of Revelation declares its prophecies deal with things “at hand” and “which must shortly come to pass.” Unlike the modern TV preachers, the Bible’s teaching is really clear. Let us not be fooled by the current peddlers of speculative theories, but let us listen to God’s teaching as declared in his truth. The premillennial theories will change and fail, but God’s word remains constant and true regardless of the changes in the world (1 Pet. 1:23 -25).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 17, p. 8-9
September 2, 1993

By Robert Wayne La Coste

No, I didn’t vote for Bill Clinton, but he is still my President. I will honor his office and will pray for him often. Surely the word of God encourages both (Rom. 13:7; 1 Tim. 2:2). However, though we live in an age and a society that seems to think one’s “rights” include being wrong; such is just not so, including the President.

Jesus reproved earthly rulers when they were wrong. Jesus told Pilate that any power he had as governor was because God gave it to him (John 19:11) and he even called Herod “a fox” (Lk. 13:32). The apostle Paul rebuked governors and kings, told them they were lost and yet did so with respect (Acts 24:25; 26:24-29).

As an evangelist of the gospel of Christ I am charged to “speak and exhort, and rebuke with all authority” (Tit. 3:15). With such divine authority, I took the liberty of sending President Clinton the following letter:

Dear President Clinton,

It is my hope you will reconsider your desire to lift the ban against homosexuals in the military. Such an unnatural sexual lifestyle can only have negative effects against our military and our nation. You are in my prayers daily, Mr. President (1 Tim. 2:2; 1 Pet. 2:17)

A Concerned Christian and Patriot, Robert Wayne LaCoste

The following was sent from the White house the following week:

Dear Robert:

Thank you for sharing your views with me regarding the ban on homosexuals in our Nation’s military.

I believe that people should be judged by their conduct, not by their status, I favor stricter rules of conduct on sexual behavior for all military personnel, along with lifting the ban. Everyone concedes there are and have been homosexuals in the military. Everyone agrees they should be separated from the service for inappropriate conduct. The only question is whether a person can acknowledge being homosexual and stay in the service if he or she has a good record and commits no improper act.

My belief is that we don’t have a person to waste. I respect the wisdom and experience of military leaders, and 1 am working with the joint Chiefs of Staff and the military services, the Congress, and others concerned to design a policy which will ensure equality and fairness, while preserving the unity and preparedness of our military.

 Though we may differ on this issue, I hope that our common concerns for the future of America will unite us. I appreciate your sincerity and candor.

 Sincerely, Bill Clinton

Now, of course, I am not naive to believe that the President himself actually sat down behind his typewriter or computer and personally sent this letter. The signature was no doubt a signature stamp or signed by one of his many secretaries. However, I was appreciative of a response being sent from the White House. Let’s with “all fairness and equity” examine the President’s position.

The President says we should judge people “by their conduct not by their status.” What does he mean by this? If he means we should judge the sexual conduct (lifestyle) of a homosexual, that’s my point exactly. By what standard shall we judge them? How shall we determine if such conduct is good or bad, evil or righteous? There is such a thing as righteous judgment to be sure, but this must be done by the highest standard of moral and spiritual ethics existent and that’s the Word of God! If the President judges such conduct by anything short of this high standard, his judgment will be only superficial and lacking in substance. What do the Scriptures say about homosexuality? Our President was reared a Baptist in Hope, Arkansas. Though we disagree with our Baptist friends on many matters of a doctrinal nature, I believe most of us know how most of them feel about this evil. We should all know what the Scriptures say and be guided by God’s judgment on the matter. God says that such conduct is “wickedness” (Gen. 19:7), “an abomination” (Lev. 18:22), and “vile affections” (Rom. 1:26). God says that “they that commit (conduct) such things are worthy of death” (Rom. 1:32).

The President seems to be implying that there have always been homosexuals in the military. I have discussed this with many World II, Korean and Vietnam veterans. Especially do the World War II vets tell me that homosexuals were never heard of among their ranks. If there were any, they never admitted it, for they knew their fellow soldiers and especially commanders would never have tolerated such. Does anyone have any idea what such men as Dwight Eisenhower, George Patton and Douglas McArthur would have said about such “men”? I believe each reader who has any knowledge of these military leaders knows full well what their feelings would have been about such conduct. Even those men who were in Vietnam, my age group, said that such conduct was intolerable. One special forces sergeant even suggested it would not have surprised him that if there were homosexuals in that war, “friendly fire” no doubt would have weeded them out. That’s sad to contemplate, but men who are fighting for their country are not going to trust such “men” with their lives when the chips are down. They figure any man who is so depraved and so morally degenerate could surely not make judgments that involve life threatening situations.

President Clinton fails to recognize what many do about the homosexual community when he says, “… they should be separated from the service for inappropriate conduct.” Homosexual conduct is such that these people have little control over their unnatural lusts. Their misconduct there-fore could take place most anytime. In the barracks or on the battlefield such conduct could be catastrophic. For just one life to be lost through such misconduct, whether by disease or by being killed by an enemy, is too great a price to pay to say that when it happens they will then be separated. Why not keep them permanently separated by keeping them out of the military altogether and away from situations where morals are so important and team dependency is a must for men to survive?

The President is naive indeed if he thinks such immorally inept people are going to maintain “a good record and commit no improper act.” Some of the homosexuals that were eventually destroyed by God in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19) were blinded by angels who were in fleshly garments visiting Lot’s home. Yet even after being punished by blindness they still wearied themselves to get into the house (v. 11). These people are not capable of maintaining good records and conduct, for their illicit sexual lusts control them at every point. Because of this, the apostle Paul says twice that God “gave up on them” (Rom. 1:24, 26) and thirdly states, “God gave them over to a reprobate mind” (Rom. 1:28). So should our President, until such people repent and turn from such a lifestyle as did some of the Corinthians (1 Cor. 6:9-11). If homosexual men and women repent and turn from such, then and only then should their “record” be judged as good and their acts proper.

Our President doesn’t want to waste anyone, but sexually transmitted diseases are wasting plenty. Why would he want to encourage such opportunity for it to increase? I read just today from the Associated Press that one in every 5 Americans has some kind of sexually transmitted disease! Folks, that’s shocking and it’s only going to get worse until we decide enough is enough.

I’m happy the President is working with all executive and congressional branches on this and especially the military leaders. Our liberal Congress concerns me as always, but I know how General Colin Powell and the Joint Chiefs feel about it. Let us all pray that President Clinton will respect their military experience and wisdom, since he has absolutely no military experience himself. Truly there is no substitute for experience. They are trying to convince him that there will be little unity and therefore much unpreparedness if he, as the Commander-in-Chief, has his way.

Yes, I differ with my President, for reasons I have stated. My concern is for him and this great nation which he now leads. If we have learned anything from the history of the nations of the earth, it is what caused their collapse. From the Babylonian empire to the great Roman and Greek empires, nations collapsed because, as King David of Israel wrote, “there was no fear of God before their eyes” (Psa. 36:1).

Perhaps this truth compelled King David to also write what all our leaders in this country need to reflect on time and again, “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psa. 3:12).

(Editor’s Not e: Although the issue of Gays in the miitary is momentarily resolved, this article is still of interest to our readers.) Gr

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 17, p. 6-7
September 2, 1993

By Ron Halbrook

Bob La Coste was born 29 December 1948 and died 16 August1993 alter a long battle with a lung disease Brother La Coste died at the Methodist Hospital in Houston IX while awaiting a double lung transplant He is survived by his wile Carolyn and by two sans Bill (19 years old on 19 August) and Tim (12) HIs funeral was held on IS August at the Wonsley Drive Church of Christ In Austin, TX. where he has preached for the past ten years Bob was buried In the Memorial Hill Cemetery at Austin

Brother La Coste will be remembered for his faith, cour age, and dedication tothecause ofChrlst. I-fe will be missed in the Northwest where he has been holding gospel meet ings for small and struggling churches since 1976 In a recent report he said With my chronic lung condition its a simple cause of have oxygen tank, will travel but rather than slowing down, lam speeding up! Tim is olthe essence (Preaching Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage in the State of Washington,” Guardian of Truth, 3 June 1993, Pp. 336- 38). Bobcarried aportableoxygen tankwith him everywhere he went but continued preaching even when it was neces sary to sit down to preach more recently Never afraid or ashamed to earnestly contend for the faith,” Bob had several debates with denominational people and liberal brethren.

Brother Ken Vaughn and I have just returned from Bobs funeral. On 18 August the Wonsley Drive church building was filled with 300-400 people, including many gospel preachers. Joe Price of Layton, lJtah, who was converted by Bob and Carolyn, preached a lesson emphasizing the hope of the gospel and Harry Osborne of Alvin, TX, who is Carolyns brother, preached from 2 Timothy 4:1-5 on the preachers charge. About six songs were sung by the congregation. Dennis Scroggins, who preaches in Austin, read appropriate passages about the resurrection at the graveside.

Carolyn has exemplified great faith in God in her whole demeanor She was agreat source of strength to Bob as she expressed herlovesang praisesto God! and prayed forhim constantly. Her example i~ an inspiration to all who witnessed it during this trial. She delighted to repeat Bobs assurance, “It is going to get better one way or the other.” One of the last things communicated to Bob was the fact that his son Bill obeyed the gospel; Harry baptIzed him in a hotel swimming pool near the hospital. Bob Indicated that he understood, and smiled in reflection of his joy and thanksgiving. Carolyn is a school teacher and plans to begin almost immediately in teaching during the new term. Though she loved Bob dearly and will miss him greatly, she wants people who know her to see that Christians do not sorrow as others which have no hope.”

Those who wish to express their love and sympathy may contact the La Coste family at 7300 South Ute Trail, Austin, Texas 78729 (phone: 512-250-5374). A memorial fund is being established for the benefit of the family and Dennis ScroggIns is helping with the details at this time.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 17, p. 8
September 2, 1993